This article is blog spam. It was written by someone with only a rudimentary understanding of the topic, which is pretty evident if you read it.
The entire purpose of this article being written was to get a good looking (SEO-wise) back link to the domain "businessmacroeconomics.com". If you look at all the links in the article, they are almost all to major news media publications (safe links to make the page look good). Then the real link appears at the end of the second-to-last section (the perfect spot for SEO). It's the only link not to a major news outlet, and if you look at that domain/website, it's some guy selling a book no one's ever heard of.
This article was 100% paid, for SEO purposes and written by someone who has no idea what they're talking about. They just ramble for 500-1000 words to get good (human-sounding) content so that google will trust it's a good backlink to the author's website and put him at a higher rank in the search results.
Either a voting ring got this post to the front page of HN, or 29 HN readers (at the time of this post) were swindled into thinking there was any substance here at all.
> Either a voting ring got this post to the front page of HN, or 29 HN readers (at the time of this post) were swindled into thinking there was any substance here at all.
I sometimes vote things solely by their title, and keep it open in a tab until I read it later. This way, I vote on topics that might provide an interesting conversation for later, without the investment of spending a lot of time reading each entry on the front page. Most of the value of HN ist the comments, and it would not be the first time that a bad article produced a great discussion.
But thanks for the research! I didn't know that was a thing.
The entire purpose of this article being written was to get a good looking (SEO-wise) back link to the domain "businessmacroeconomics.com". If you look at all the links in the article, they are almost all to major news media publications (safe links to make the page look good). Then the real link appears at the end of the second-to-last section (the perfect spot for SEO). It's the only link not to a major news outlet, and if you look at that domain/website, it's some guy selling a book no one's ever heard of.
This article was 100% paid, for SEO purposes and written by someone who has no idea what they're talking about. They just ramble for 500-1000 words to get good (human-sounding) content so that google will trust it's a good backlink to the author's website and put him at a higher rank in the search results.
Either a voting ring got this post to the front page of HN, or 29 HN readers (at the time of this post) were swindled into thinking there was any substance here at all.